Michael

History

Recent Comments

I am not suggesting that he is a great coach, but this specific argument doesn't make any sense at all. What are the specific offensive square pegs you're talking about? QB is the obvious one, and it isn't even that obvious considering he's coached effective passing spreads in the past.

But even if you go to a pro style offense to coddle your QB, you are doing that to the detriment of the other 10 positions on offense. Your OL, WRs, RBs, TEs are all being coached (less effectively) to do something that is not what they will be doing from the following year on out.

Yeah man, losing by a field goal to a team that went 13-0 and beat Alabama in the Sugar Bowl is terrible.

But that's not even the point. Rich Rodriguez inherited an offense with virtually zero experience. I think there was like 3 combined starts along the OL, and definitely a QB with no game experience. So what was he supposed to do, exactly? Install an offense that isn't his core competency, so he's training his young roster for a new offense that they won't even be running the next year? He was hired precisely to modernize a stale program.

Beating a dead horse, yadda yadda, but for some reason this moronic argument still irks me.

You realize that he got his start doing sports analysis, right? And that his site is funded by ESPN? The OP is both relevant and interesting. I'll never understandw why people get offended by a data nerd whose site spends most of its time covering non-political topics when not in the middle of an election cycle.

While there will be plenty of parents who will disallow their kids' participation in football, so long as it's a sport that generates a lot of income for those who make it professionally, it can sustain itself as is. A major reason why is that it's a "way out" for kids in underserved communities.

Mr. Yost is also correct that there's no reason why more can't be done about this, especially at the professional level.

College Football at its core is a tribal endeavor. The more excuses to hate your opponent you can find, the better. I don't feel disrespected by Scott Frost, but I do hope we beat his team so badly that he decides to quit football.

This is an interesting post and I'm not sure there's a satisfying answer. I'm not sure something like what you're asking for exists, nor do I think there's much of a demand from non-casual baseball fans. I'll do some research.

I grew up playing baseball and love watching the game, even when my team is rebuilding. When people say there isn't any "action" in baseball, I assume they're talking about scoring. Low scoring games are usually the result of great pitching, which is an absolute treat to watch. We are in an era with a ton of great pitching (rotation and relief) and that's the biggest reason why there are fewer runs being scored. Perhaps appreciating great pitching requires more than a casual understanding of the game, which may be baseball's biggest issue; it requires nuance and an attention span that many other sports do not. That and it's largely free of the soap opera stuff that ESPN loves to talk about. (OMG JOHNNY FOOTBALL)

The sport is also a lot more athletic than is used to be, which I believe has resulted in much better defense (though I have no numbers to back this up) across the board. Young, athletic teams with great pitching like the Marlins are really fun to watch.

Unfortunately baseball is becoming more like soccer, where families need to spend a lot of money to ensure their kids are able to play in summer leagues, travel squads, etc., so a lot of would-be excellent baseball players end up playing other sports. Fortunately Latin America and Japan exist.